| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Kennedy, K. M., et al.
(author)
-
Questioning the fetal microbiome illustrates pitfalls of low-biomass microbial studies
- 2023
-
In: Nature. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0028-0836 .- 1476-4687. ; 613:7945, s. 639-649
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Whether the human fetus and the prenatal intrauterine environment (amniotic fluid and placenta) are stably colonized by microbial communities in a healthy pregnancy remains a subject of debate. Here we evaluate recent studies that characterized microbial populations in human fetuses from the perspectives of reproductive biology, microbial ecology, bioinformatics, immunology, clinical microbiology and gnotobiology, and assess possible mechanisms by which the fetus might interact with microorganisms. Our analysis indicates that the detected microbial signals are likely the result of contamination during the clinical procedures to obtain fetal samples or during DNA extraction and DNA sequencing. Furthermore, the existence of live and replicating microbial populations in healthy fetal tissues is not compatible with fundamental concepts of immunology, clinical microbiology and the derivation of germ-free mammals. These conclusions are important to our understanding of human immune development and illustrate common pitfalls in the microbial analyses of many other low-biomass environments. The pursuit of a fetal microbiome serves as a cautionary example of the challenges of sequence-based microbiome studies when biomass is low or absent, and emphasizes the need for a trans-disciplinary approach that goes beyond contamination controls by also incorporating biological, ecological and mechanistic concepts.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Seppanen, AV, et al.
(author)
-
Follow-up after very preterm birth in Europe
- 2022
-
In: Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition. - : BMJ. - 1468-2052 .- 1359-2998. ; 107:1, s. 113-114
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
- Zeitlin, J, et al.
(author)
-
Priorities for collaborative research using very preterm birth cohorts
- 2020
-
In: Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition. - : BMJ. - 1468-2052 .- 1359-2998. ; 105:5, s. 538-544
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- To develop research priorities on the consequences of very preterm (VPT) birth for the RECAP Preterm platform which brings together data from 23 European VPT birth cohorts.Design and settingThis study used a two-round modified Delphi consensus process. Round 1 was based on 28 research themes related to childhood outcomes (<12 years) derived from consultations with cohort researchers. An external panel of multidisciplinary stakeholders then ranked their top 10 themes and provided comments. In round 2, panel members provided feedback on rankings and on new themes suggested in round 1.ResultsOf 71 individuals contacted, 64 (90%) participated as panel members comprising obstetricians, neonatologists, nurses, general and specialist paediatricians, psychologists, physiotherapists, parents, adults born preterm, policy makers and epidemiologists from 17 countries. All 28 initial themes were ranked in the top 10 by at least six panel members. Highest ranking themes were: education (73% of panel members' top 10 choices); care and outcomes of extremely preterm births, including ethical decisions (63%); growth and nutrition (60%); emotional well-being and social inclusion (55%); parental stress (55%) and impact of social circumstances on outcomes (52%). Highest ranking themes were robust across panel members classified by background. 15 new themes had at least 6 top 10 endorsements in round 2.ConclusionsThis study elicited a broad range of research priorities on the consequences of VPT birth, with good consensus on highest ranks between stakeholder groups. Several highly ranked themes focused on the socioemotional needs of children and parents, which have been less studied.
|
|
